The electron, its isolation and measurement and the determination of some of its properties
John Stuart Mill · en
As to the Vienna data on mercury and gold, Dr. Ehrenhaft publishes,
all told, data on just sixteen particles and takes for his
Brownian-movement calculations on the average fifteen times
of fall and fifteen of rise on each, the smallest number being 6
and the largest 27. He then computes his statistical average
from observations of this sort. Next
he assumes Perrin’s value of , namely, ,
which corresponds to , and obtains instead by the
Brownian-movement method, i.e., the method, the following
values of , the exponential term being omitted for the sake of
brevity: 1.43, 2.13, 1.38, 3.04, 3.5, 6.92, 4.42, 3.28, .84. Barring
the first three and the last of these, the mean value of is just
about what it should be, namely, 4.22 instead of 4.1. Further, the
first three particles are the heaviest ones, the first one falling
between his cross-hairs in 3.6 seconds, and its fluctuations in time
of fall are from 3.2 to 3.85 seconds, that is, three-tenths of a
second on either side of the mean value. Now, these fluctuations
are only slightly greater than those which the average observer will
make in timing the passage of a uniformly moving body across equally
spaced cross-hairs. This means that in these observations two
nearly equally potent causes were operating to produce fluctuations.
The observed ’s were, of course, then, larger than those
due to Brownian movements alone, and might easily, with but a few
observations, be two or three times as large. Since
[Pg 171]
appears in the denominator of equation
(29), it will be seen at once that because of the observer’s timing
errors a series of observed ’s will always tend to be
larger than the due to Brownian movements alone, and hence
that the Brownian-movement method always tends to yield too low a value
of , and accordingly too low a value of . It is only when
the observer’s mean error is wholly negligible in comparison with the
Brownian-movement fluctuations that this method will not yield too low
a value of . The overlooking of this fact is, in my judgment,
one of the causes of the low values of recorded by Dr. Ehrenhaft.